Published: December 2, 2025
India’s decision to quietly order smartphone makers to pre‑install a government cyber‑safety app called Sanchar Saathi on every new phone – and to push it to many existing devices – has exploded into a full‑blown political, legal and tech-industry row.
On Tuesday, opposition leaders called the move “unconstitutional” and “Orwellian”, Apple signalled it will not comply with the order, and Communications Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia was forced to publicly insist that the app is “optional” and can be deleted. [1]
Here’s a deep dive into what changed, why it matters, and what it means for anyone using a smartphone in India today.
What exactly has the government ordered?
The controversy stems from a 28 November directive issued by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) under the Telecom Cyber Security Rules, 2024. [2]
Key points from the order, as reported by multiple outlets and now shared by opposition leaders, are:
- Mandatory pre‑install: All smartphone manufacturers and importers must ensure Sanchar Saathi is pre‑installed on every new handset meant for sale in India.
- Cannot be disabled: The directive says the app’s “functionalities are not disabled or restricted”, effectively meaning users should not be able to remove or switch it off. [3]
- Push to existing phones: For phones already manufactured or sitting in sales channels, companies are told to push the app via software updates “where feasible”. [4]
- Tight timelines:
- Enforcement teeth: Non‑compliance can invite action under the Telecommunications Act, 2023 and cyber‑security rules, according to the text shared by Congress leaders. [7]
Crucially, the order was not made public initially; it was sent privately to manufacturers and surfaced through media leaks, including detailed reporting by Reuters and Indian outlets. [8]
What is the Sanchar Saathi app and portal?
Sanchar Saathi (“communication companion”) is a government-run cyber safety platform developed by the Department of Telecommunications. It exists as both a mobile app and a web portal. [9]
According to official documentation, Sanchar Saathi bundles several citizen‑facing tools: [10]
- CEIR – Block / trace lost phones
- Lets users block a lost or stolen handset across all Indian mobile networks using its IMEI number.
- Generates “traceability” if someone tries to use a blocked device.
- TAFCOP – Check SIMs in your name
- Shows how many mobile connections are registered to your ID.
- Allows you to report numbers you never took or no longer need.
- KYM – Check handset genuineness
- Validates whether a phone’s IMEI is genuine, helping curb counterfeit devices.
- Chakshu – Report suspected fraud & spam
- A reporting system for scam calls, phishing links, malicious APKs and unsolicited commercial communication (spam).
- Other modules
- Report international calls that spoof an Indian (+91) number.
- Look up wired internet providers in your area.
- Verify “trusted contact details” such as bank helplines and official websites.
The government points to its track record: the platform has helped block or trace millions of devices and terminate tens of millions of fraudulent mobile connections, according to DoT dashboards and recent explainer pieces. [11]
Why are privacy advocates alarmed?
At the heart of the backlash is the gap between what the order says and how the government is now trying to present it.
1. Non‑removable vs “optional”
- The order itself tells manufacturers to pre‑install the app and ensure its functionality cannot be disabled or restricted, effectively making it permanent bloatware with privileged access. [12]
- Under pressure, the government now insists the system is “voluntary and democratic” and that users can delete the app at any time – a position repeated by Scindia on X, in TV interactions and a formal PIB press release. [13]
That contradiction – a hard mandate in the confidential order versus a softer public pitch – is precisely what worries legal and digital‑rights experts.
2. Very broad permissions
Independent tests and tech reporting show that once installed and registered, Sanchar Saathi can request access to: [14]
- Call logs
- SMS logs and ability to send SMS (for registration and verification)
- Phone state and call management
- Camera (for scanning IMEI and documents)
- Photos and files / device storage
- Network information and notifications
While the app’s own privacy policy says personal data will not be shared with third parties except law‑enforcement and that data will be secured, it still confirms that extensive device permissions are collected. [15]
Digital rights organisations argue that bundling such a powerful app as a non‑removable, government‑mandated tool on every smartphone “removes user consent as a meaningful choice” and could be repurposed for much deeper surveillance in the future. [16]
3. No technical transparency
Several analysts note that there is no public technical documentation explaining how data flows through the app, what’s stored, who can access it, or how long it is retained. [17]
Combined with India’s broader expansion of surveillance tools and weak data‑protection enforcement, critics see the mandate as one more step toward mass digital monitoring. [18]
Congress and opposition: “Unconstitutional”, “Orwellian”, “snooping app”
On Tuesday, the political temperature rose sharply.
Congress escalates attack
- Congress general secretary K.C. Venugopal called the DoT direction “beyond unconstitutional”, arguing that the right to privacy – recognised by India’s Supreme Court as part of the fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21 – is being bulldozed by a pre‑loaded government app that citizens cannot meaningfully refuse. [19]
- He warned that a state app capable of sitting on every phone is a “dystopian tool to monitor every Indian” and demanded an immediate rollback of the order. [20]
Other Congress figures echoed that line, with senior leaders using phrases like “Big Brother cannot watch us” on social media to frame the move as state overreach into personal devices. [21]
Priyanka Gandhi’s “dictatorship” warning
Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra went further, describing Sanchar Saathi as a “snooping app” and accusing the government of turning the country towards a dictatorship. [22]
She raised the issue outside Parliament alongside other opposition MPs, linking the mandate with previous concerns over spyware and digital surveillance.
Wider opposition chorus
Other parties and civil society groups have also weighed in:
- Activists describe the mandate as “Orwellian”, pointing to the order’s language that bars disabling the app. [23]
- Some regional leaders have urged states to formally oppose the directive or explore legal challenges if the Centre does not withdraw or amend it. [24]
Government’s counter: “Voluntary, not surveillance – a citizen safety tool”
Facing backlash at home and headlines abroad, the government has launched a rapid messaging campaign to reframe Sanchar Saathi.
Scindia’s clarification blitz
In Parliament’s corridors, press conferences and a detailed statement via the Press Information Bureau, Communications Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia stressed that: [25]
- Sanchar Saathi is a “completely voluntary and democratic system”.
- Users may delete the app at any time if they don’t want it.
- Features activate only after voluntary registration by the user.
- The app is designed to protect, not spy on, citizens – especially vulnerable users facing rampant cyber fraud.
Scindia framed the controversy as a misunderstanding, arguing that the government’s responsibility is to “introduce this app to everyone”, while the decision to keep or delete it rests with individuals. [26]
The official justification
The Ministry of Communications and DoT say the mandate is aimed at: [27]
- Combating telecom-related cyber fraud and phishing.
- Blocking misuse of duplicate or spoofed IMEI numbers.
- Curbing the resale of stolen or blacklisted devices.
- Empowering citizens to report scams and verify genuine numbers and devices.
They highlight success metrics: millions of phones blocked or traced and tens of millions of fraudulent connections disconnected since the project went live, arguing that scaling it via pre‑installation will dramatically increase coverage and impact. [28]
However, neither the PIB note nor Scindia’s comments clearly address the disconnect with the original order, which still instructs manufacturers that the app’s functionality must not be disabled.
Apple pushes back, other manufacturers in limbo
The row is not just political – it’s also a serious industry flashpoint in one of the world’s largest smartphone markets.
Apple: “Can’t do this. Period.”
According to a Reuters exclusive published Tuesday, Apple has told associates it does not intend to comply with the preload mandate. [29]
Key points from that reporting:
- The government’s confidential directive covers Apple, Samsung, Xiaomi and other major brands and demands pre‑loading Sanchar Saathi within 90 days, with the app non‑disableable and later pushed to existing devices via updates.
- Apple’s internal policy bars pre‑installation of third‑party or government apps on iPhones anywhere in the world.
- The company believes complying would raise serious security and privacy issues for its tightly controlled iOS ecosystem.
- Apple is not planning an immediate court battle but will privately convey its refusal to Indian authorities.
Industry sources quoted in the same report described the order as using a “sledgehammer” approach, warning that it undermines long‑standing app‑security models and sets a troubling precedent.
Android makers weighing options
Android‑based manufacturers such as Samsung, Xiaomi, Vivo and Oppo have more flexibility to customise software and historically have preloaded a variety of local apps. Yet even these companies are said to be reviewing the order carefully, wary of privacy concerns and potential backlash from increasingly sensitive users. [30]
So far, none of the major Android OEMs has publicly committed to either fully comply or resist, leaving a rare standoff between New Delhi and some of the world’s biggest tech brands.
How international media is viewing the Sanchar Saathi mandate
The story has quickly gone global:
- The Financial Times framed the mandate as a major escalation in India’s digital control, noting that Sanchar Saathi can access call logs, device memory and the camera, and warning that the move could significantly reshape privacy expectations for hundreds of millions of Indians. [31]
- Reuters and the Associated Press highlighted the contradiction between the undisclosed order and the government’s public insistence that the app is voluntary, comparing the policy to Russia’s recent requirement that phones ship with a state‑backed messenger, MAX. [32]
- The Guardian underlined concerns from technology lawyers that forcing a non‑removable government app onto phones “effectively removes user consent as a meaningful choice”, even while acknowledging the app’s role in blocking millions of stolen devices and fraudulent connections. [33]
- Tech outlets such as The Verge and others have zeroed in on the non‑deletable aspect of the original directive and the risk that Sanchar Saathi becomes state‑mandated bloatware on every new Android phone sold in India. [34]
The BBC has also amplified the controversy on its global and regional platforms, presenting it as part of a broader debate over smartphone mandates and government access to user data. [35]
What this means for Indian smartphone users right now
For everyday users, the situation is confusing – partly because the legal order and political messaging don’t perfectly align.
Based on what’s known as of December 2, 2025:
- New phones are supposed to ship with Sanchar Saathi pre‑installed within the next few months, unless the order is amended or withdrawn. [36]
- Existing phones may receive the app via OTA updates, especially devices still in the supply chain or recently manufactured, though technical and logistical hurdles mean implementation will likely be uneven. [37]
- The government now says you can delete it. In multiple clarifications today, Scindia stressed that users are free to uninstall the app and are not obliged to register or use it. [38]
- Permissions remain a concern. If you do choose to register and use the app, expect requests for broad access – calls, messages, camera and storage – similar to other powerful security or anti‑theft tools. Users worried about data collection may want to weigh benefits against these permissions. [39]
- The legal status could shift. If Apple or civil society groups decide to challenge the order, or if political pressure mounts, the government may be forced to revise the directive, explicitly align it with the “optional” stance, or introduce stronger data‑protection guarantees.
The bigger picture: Cybercrime vs civil liberties
Sanchar Saathi sits at the intersection of two powerful realities in India:
- A surge in cyber fraud, SIM‑swap scams, spam calls and handset theft, which genuinely hurt millions of users every year.
- A growing infrastructure of state surveillance, from facial recognition and CCTV networks to interception systems and ID databases, which has long worried privacy advocates. [40]
Supporters argue that:
- A centralised, government‑backed app is the fastest way to give citizens a simple interface to block phones, report scams and clear fraudulent mobile connections.
- High smartphone penetration – over 700 million devices – makes pre‑installation the only realistic way to reach less‑tech‑savvy users quickly. [41]
Critics counter that:
- Cybersecurity must not come at the cost of blanket, non‑consensual control over people’s personal devices.
- Without strong laws, independent oversight and technical transparency, any such app can become a tool of mass surveillance, even if its initial purpose is narrow. [42]
The Sanchar Saathi dispute has therefore become a proxy battle over the future of digital rights in India: Are state‑mandated apps the new normal, or is this a red line citizens and companies will push back against?
Key unanswered questions
As of December 2, 2025, several crucial issues remain unresolved:
- Will the written order be amended?
- Will the DoT formally rewrite the directive to reflect Scindia’s claim that the app is optional and deletable, or will manufacturers still face a non‑removal requirement on paper? [43]
- How will Apple and other OEMs respond formally?
- A quiet refusal from Apple could trigger negotiations, exemptions, or – if talks fail – a messy legal or regulatory clash. [44]
- What safeguards will be added?
- Will the government publish technical documentation, independent audits, or explicit limits on data collection and retention to reassure citizens? [45]
- Could this expand to other government apps?
- Experts fear that if this mandate stands, it could pave the way for future required apps – from digital ID to payments – further entrenching state software on private devices. [46]
Until those questions are answered, India’s Sanchar Saathi experiment will remain a test case closely watched by privacy advocates, tech giants and governments worldwide.
References
1. www.tribuneindia.com, 2. www.reuters.com, 3. www.reuters.com, 4. www.reuters.com, 5. www.reuters.com, 6. www.tribuneindia.com, 7. www.tribuneindia.com, 8. www.reuters.com, 9. sancharsaathi.gov.in, 10. sancharsaathi.gov.in, 11. sancharsaathi.gov.in, 12. www.reuters.com, 13. www.pib.gov.in, 14. www.reuters.com, 15. sancharsaathi.gov.in, 16. www.reuters.com, 17. www.medianama.com, 18. en.wikipedia.org, 19. www.tribuneindia.com, 20. www.tribuneindia.com, 21. www.reuters.com, 22. www.newindianexpress.com, 23. www.thehansindia.com, 24. www.deccanherald.com, 25. www.pib.gov.in, 26. telecom.economictimes.indiatimes.com, 27. apnews.com, 28. sancharsaathi.gov.in, 29. www.reuters.com, 30. www.theguardian.com, 31. www.ft.com, 32. www.reuters.com, 33. www.theguardian.com, 34. www.theverge.com, 35. x.com, 36. www.reuters.com, 37. www.reuters.com, 38. www.business-standard.com, 39. www.livemint.com, 40. en.wikipedia.org, 41. www.ft.com, 42. www.reuters.com, 43. www.pib.gov.in, 44. www.reuters.com, 45. www.medianama.com, 46. apnews.com
